2007 SCMR 1385 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 SCMR 1385 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and M. Javed Buttar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)-- |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 SCMR 1385 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)-- as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 SCMR 1385 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and M. Javed Buttar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 SCMR 1385 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Niaz Ahmad Rathore, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 29-3-2005, passed by the High Court Balochistan, Quetta, in Criminal Jail Appeal No.8 of 2005).
S. 9
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted to accused to consider inter alia the contentions that neither he was produced before any Magistrate immediately after his arrest, nor the delay of four days in lodging the F.I.R. was explained and that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused for the recovery of 1100 grams of "Chars". Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
The learned counsel submitted, inter alia, that the petitioner was apprehended by the Frontier Constabulary, Chaman, on 30-12-2002, whereas, the F.I.R. No.1 of 2003 was got registered with Police Station Leveys, Chaman, District Qila Abdullah on 2-1-2003 with a delay of four days and that he was neither produced before any Magistrate immediately after his arrest nor the delay regarding the F.I.R. was explained. It was further contended that the prosecution had failed to prove its case, against the petitioner, for the recovery of 1100 grams of Chars.
2. Leave to appeal is granted to consider the above and other submissions of the learned counsel. Since the sentence awarded to the petitioner is short, the office is directed to fix the main appeal, on its present record, within a period of four months. N.H.Q./M-39/SC Leave granted.